Addendum: I one discussed with a philosopher the question: What is your argument against libertarianism?
He said: It would be a tyranny of lawyers. Let's not have a tyranny of lawyers. Let us, the engineers and hackers, exercise the necessary control over those pesky lawyers by defining and redefining the state of the art in technology, and prevent them from defining it by themselves. For a hammer, everything looks like a nail. What is the better options: To suggest people to pay for legal advice by lawyers, who only offer lengthy disclaimers and such for bypassing the right to be forgotten, or simply discuss technical changes for git which enable its easy implementation, without legal excuses for not doing supporting it? Best wishes Peter -- Peter Backes, r...@helen.plasma.xg8.de
